M1a Socom16 : Adding NM or scout sights or a scope, crazy talk?

Status
Not open for further replies.
One of these was shot with my SOCOM with an Aimpoint on it, the other my SAR1 with an Aimpoint on it. At this point, I dont remember which was which (it was awhile ago), but does it really matter?

ry%3D400.jpg


When I said the SOCOM was barely a 100 yard gun, I was referring to using it as it comes out of the box with the XS front sight on the gun. At 100 yards, that sight completely covers the body on an IPSC type target, making it difficult to make good hits. On anything smaller, its pretty tough to hold anything with any kind of consistency. Even with a Leupold scout scope on mine, I could never get it to shoot better than 2-3" at 100 yards using reloads the gun liked. With a red dot, well, you can see the results above. Now, I normally dont shoot off a bench, and most of my shooting is done at targets that dont have an aiming point, but that usually isnt to much of an issue when it comes to being realistic in the guns capabilities.

Unfortunately, I dont have any of my SOCOM's 200 yard targets, but I do have one shot with my old SAR1 at 200, using only its slightly canted iron sights. The lower three rounds were fried from a rest to confirm zero, the upper group from a cross legged sitting position and fired at a fairly steady cadence. Ammo was Wolf 154 grain SP's the gun likes.

ry%3D400.jpg

And just so you dont think it was a fluke, this was one just prior to the first while I was chasing the zero around....

ry%3D400.jpg

I know I couldnt do that with the SOCOM and its XS front sight at 100 yards, I didnt even bother at 200. I do know it shot about the same as my AK's and my AR's, when using the Aimpoint though.

Now, whether it was my rifle or not, I cant say. It seemed to shoot reasonably well with the dot or scope, and with the irons within their reasonable use. To be fair, the only way I could tell you if it was, would have been to put a set of the "Scouts" irons on it and compare the results to that of my standard size and Bush (pre Scout) models when shot at high power targets. At least there, it would be an even comparison.
 
I think you're looking at it in the wrong way.
Not really. Im looking at it from my way, and what I was getting out of it, or not. Im not mad at the SOCOM, and Im not bad mouthing it (other than some quality issues I had with Springfield), but after living with one for awhile and trying to get to like it, I just found I liked other things that did its "job" better, thats all.

The SOCOM's biggest limitation from a shooting standpoint, is its sights. With a red dot, its realistically a 300 yard gun at best. With a scout scope, you might get a little more, but then you lose in other respects.

Having had all three, other than the shorter guns being a little handier in tighter places, they all pretty much weigh and handle the same. While the shorter M1A's are slightly smaller than the standard, they still arent near as handy as the AK or AR, which I find to be more usable and shootable, especially when shot realistically.

If I was going to be shooting at 600 yards, which for me these days would be on a target range (I can actually take that shot out my back door, but why would I use an iron sighted M1A?), it would be with the standard model. Why limit myself?
 
AK103K-

I'm confused. I thought I was responding to jlott00's post about 7.62x51 vs. 7.62x39. Why are you rebutting me?

I think you and I are in pretty close accord on the SOCOM.

-LC
 
I put an Eotec on my Socom 16. It is zeroed in for 200 yards. That makes it an up close gun plus I can make longer shots. 300 yards being max for good accuracy. I think it is a damn good rifle.
Senper Fi
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top